Glossary entry

French term or phrase:

captation parasitaire

English translation:

BrE: diversion of trade / attracting of custom / by passing-off; US Am. misappropriation of clients > goodwill

Added to glossary by Adrian MM.
Jul 20, 2020 13:07
3 yrs ago
42 viewers *
French term

captation parasitaire

French to English Law/Patents Law: Patents, Trademarks, Copyright
Court judgment about unfair and parasitic competition, and trademark infringement.

"La concurrence déloyale comme le parasitisme présentent la caractéristique commune d'être appréciés à l'aune du principe de la liberté du commerce qui implique qu'un produit qui ne fait pas ou ne fait plus l'objet de droits de propriété intellectuelle, puisse être librement reproduit, sous certaines conditions tenant à l'absence de faute par la création d'un risque de confusion dans l'esprit de la clientèle sur l'origine du produit ou par l'existence d'une captation parasitaire, circonstances attentatoires à l'exercice paisible et loyal du commerce."

The word captation occurs one more time in the document:

"Si comme le relèvent les défenderesses, la société XXX met elle-même en avant sa réussite et la hausse de son chiffre d'affaires sur les années 2016 et 2017, il ne peut en être déduit l'absence de toute captation de clientèle, sur un marché du conseil en forte croissance."

The idea seems to be "capturing" clientele due to the wrongful acts. But is "capture" the right English word to use in this context? If it is "capturing" or "capture", do we have to be explicit about what is being captured: "parasitic capturing of clientele"?
Change log

Jul 27, 2020 11:16: Adrian MM. Created KOG entry

Jul 27, 2020 11:17: Adrian MM. changed "Edited KOG entry" from "<a href="/profile/2688125">Adrian MM.'s</a> old entry - "captation parasitaire"" to ""BrE: diversion of trade / attracting of custom / by passing-off; US Am. misappropriation of cleints / goodwill""

Discussion

TechLawDC Jul 22, 2020:
(Rule for using own name) As I recall, any name among the 100 most frequent names in the London telephone book is protected from liability as "misappropriation", but as mentioned, one would expect that physical proximity, storefront similarity, etc. may restore liability to some extent. In any event, for most names the possession of the name is not a defense. A fortiori considering that legal name changes are available.
AllegroTrans Jul 22, 2020:
Reminds me... of a Winchester teashop proprietor named John Forte whose establishment was (and still is) called Forte's. He had to fight (successfully) an expensive legal challenge by the Granada Group who were claiming proprietary rights to what was only the poor man's surname. The irony was that he is a distant relation to Charles Forte, the founder of the Forte hotel and restaurant group.
Adrian MM. Jul 21, 2020:
Mpoma @ The King's Head or Marquess of Anglesey Certainly there would be a case for the publican of a thriving King's Head to consult his or her lawyer in the case of a deliberate mis-representation by a copycat setting up round the corner. In the case of a less common name like the Marquess of Anglesey, once with three pubs of that name within a 600-yard or metre radius of Trafalgar Square-to-Covent Garden, the sheer scope for confusion meant that two pubs had to change their name.
Mpoma (asker) Jul 21, 2020:
@Adrian MM Yes, in fact when I was pondering these matters earlier I wondered specifically about names of businesses, and if they are small there's little chance of them being registered trademarks. In fact most are probably impossible to register: forgetting chains and pubcos for the minute, how many King's Head pubs are there up and down the UK? But does that mean you can just open a second King's Head just round the corner from a thriving existing one?

Having done quite a few of these sorts of cases it is always fun to see French judges reasoning meticulously to try and decide whether something is an unfair practice. (Although usually it is: I doubt whether many would reach court if things weren't quite open-and-shut).
Adrian MM. Jul 21, 2020:
definition of 'le parasitisme' We may need to think outside of the narrow categories, both in French and English Common law, of regd. vs. an unregd. trademark, such as that of the name of a Restaurant des Crêpes in Paris or London that may take issue with the unfair competition posed by a Restaurant of the Creeps around the corner and that 'attracts the custom' of all , or most, of the pancakes business by 'leeching off' the rival's unregd. name https://www.186.legal/article_juridique/le-parasitisme-la-co...

PS I assume the translation is for UK 'passing-off' consumption rather than NB for US 'misappropriation of clients = goodwill' use; see TechLaw DCs answer.
Mpoma (asker) Jul 21, 2020:
@Daryo Yes. In fact the plaintiffs have two heads of damages: one based on trademark infringement, the other on unfair and parasitic competition. They want the court to make two awards. Here the court is discussing whether to allow both. Misleading customers about the origin of a product presumably is a fault regardless of intellectual property matters.

But it still puzzled me: I assumed that if you have an unprotected trademark anyone can slavishly imitate it etc. But a quick glance at the Wikip page for "passing off" (Adrian MM's solution) shows that it isn't that simple: "In common law countries such as the UK, Australia and New Zealand, passing off is a common law tort which can be used to enforce unregistered trade mark rights. The tort of passing off protects the goodwill of a trader from misrepresentation."
Daryo Jul 20, 2020:
a digression un produit qui ne fait pas ou ne fait plus l'objet de droits de propriété intellectuelle,
=
where could be the "trademark infringement" if there is no Intellectual property to infringe on?

Maybe somewhere else in the text, but not here.

Proposed translations

+1
1 hr
French term (edited): une captation parasitaire
Selected

a diversion of trade by passing-off

A lower confidence level than the earlier questions. Parasitic is indeed used for imitation but the picture that comes to my mind is hawkers outside well-known dept. stores in London's West End or 'parasites' who try to divert customers away with counterfeit products from countries that shall remain nameless.

Otherwise, if Alzheimers's memory serves me right, Heil v. Hedges 1951 is the well-known English product liability case in comm. law - and which my law-school peers found hilarious - in which a butcher got sued, unsuccessfully, for a parasitic worm found in an under-cooked pork chop.

Obiter: 'unlawful interference with contract' is a related English tort caused e.g. by catering workers striking 40 years ago outside a famous restaurant in Covent Garden from which they had been recently sacked and warning off passers-by.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 heures (2020-07-20 15:39:38 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

To anticipate predictable US-Am. and CanE objections, passing-off in the UK does indeed double as 'palming off' and 'misappropriation' - not only of Yours Truly's answers.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 5 heures (2020-07-20 18:13:28 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Passing-off as a 'widely misunderstood' tort is a 'broad /Anglo-Irish / church' and IMO can be used for consultancy services - though I fear a Transatlantic palming-off or mis-appropriation 'backlash' when our US and Can. colleagues wake up in a different time zone.
Example sentence:

In Montgomery v Thompson (1891), the "Stone Ales" / passing-off/ case: Mr Thompson suffered damage as a result: loss of profit, caused by *diversion of trade*

Note from asker:
Haha. Informative and amusing as ever. Shall we call you Rumpole (formerly) of the Bailey? Re the actual translation: can we really use "passing off" in a context of corporate providers of consultancy services (see text: "marché du conseil")?
Peer comment(s):

agree AllegroTrans : Well this certainly ties in with 'risk of confusion'
1 hr
Thanks, AT.
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Thanks"
-1
1 hr

parasitic gain in business/customers

I think you have to preserve the "parasitic" idea, because it's important.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2020-07-20 15:02:33 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Or "parasitic customer/business gain" might be better.
Note from asker:
I agree that "parasitic" must be included and that it's widely used. Sceptics just have to google "parasitic business practices" - note UK spelling, proving that this isn't a "mere" Americanism.
Peer comment(s):

neutral Francois Boye : what does it mean in business or economics?//Read my attachment.
9 mins
I don't understand your question.
disagree AllegroTrans : Using "parasitic" in English is really a no-no, I've never see it used in this context, there are other words to express the notion
1 hr
It's a widely used term. Some of the examples here are from IATE, and from EU bodies: http://glosbe.com/en/en/parasitic competition
neutral Daryo : yes for "parasitic" but not the rest.
7 hrs
Something went wrong...
7 hrs

misappropriation of customers; misappropriation of clients

This appears to be a special type of unfair competition which is treated separately under the law.
Ref.:
http://www.lawyers-picovschi.com/article-misappropriation-of...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2020-07-20 20:16:08 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Alternative: misappropriation of customers by deception as to the provenance of a product or service.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 19 hrs (2020-07-21 08:49:50 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I would add: Alternative 2: misappropriation of customers by deception as to the provenance of a product or service, but not directly prosecutable under Trademark Law.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 19 hrs (2020-07-21 08:51:36 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

(In other words, I have restated "usurpation de notoriété" in English.)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 19 hrs (2020-07-21 08:56:21 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Alternative 3: misappropriation of the identity or reputation of a competitor toward customers or clients (or potential customers or clients), other than such misappropriation directly prosecutable under Trademark Law.
Peer comment(s):

neutral Daryo : that would imply that "clients" are in some way in the "ownership" of their current suppliers - wrong assumption: no one "owns" their clients, whatever all sort of middlemen in all sort of businesses like to presume.
1 hr
I used "clients" as a synonym for "customers" as per my Trademark Law textbook. The point is that "misappropriation" as used here is violation of attribution rights which violation is not directly prosecutable under Trademark Law.
Something went wrong...
1 day 14 hrs

parasitic exploitation

Something went wrong...

Reference comments

10 hrs
Reference:

Concurrence déloyale

le parasitisme

Une entreprise peut subir un trouble commercial important lorsqu’un concurrent adopte à son égard un comportement parasitaire en tentant de s’approprier sans bourse délier son savoir-faire, son travail intellectuel et ses investissements. Ainsi, est par exemple sanctionnée:

l’utilisation de l’argumentaire commercial ou promotionnel d’une entreprise concurrente
la reprise du code couleur constituant l’identité d’un concurrent
l’imitation d’un produit concurrent qui n’est pas protégé par un droit de propriété intellectuelle (droit d’auteur, droit des marques, brevet)

Un tel comportement est sanctionné même lorsque les divers intervenants ne sont pas concurrents, et sans qu’il soit forcément nécessaire de démontrer un risque de confusion entre ces derniers.

Il s’agit alors d’une usurpation de notoriété consistant à créer un rattachement fictif avec les produits ou la marque d’une entreprise afin de tirer profit de son image et de sa réputation en donnant l’apparence de produits ou services connexes ou dérivés.

[...
le dénigrement

Les tribunaux sanctionnent le fait de jeter le discrédit sur un concurrent, nommé ou aisément identifiable, en répandant à son propos, ou au sujet de ses produits ou services, des informations malveillantes.

la désorganisation

La désorganisation déloyale d’une entreprise par un concurrent peut prendre diverses formes telles que l’incitation à la grève du personnel, la divulgation d’un savoir-faire ou encore, et c’est sa forme la plus fréquente, le débauchage de personnel.

le détournement de commandes

Le fait de détourner les commandes d’un concurrent est sanctionné au titre de la concurrence déloyale.

Le détournement de commandes peut prendre diverses formes, telles que l’incitation par un concurrent à la résiliation de commande en vue de les exécuter à son profit ou encore le report, par un salarié en préavis de départ, de commandes sur la société qu’il a créée;

...]

la captation de clientèle

S’il n’existe pas de droit privatif sur la clientèle permettant de sanctionner le simple démarchage de la clientèle d’un concurrent, un tel procédé est sanctionné dès lors qu’il est accompagné d’agissements déloyaux.

Tel est par exemple le cas lorsqu’une entreprise prospecte systématiquement tous les clients de son concurrent ou encore lorsqu’elle annonce de manière mensongère la cessation d’activité d’un concurrent.

https://chloe-fernstrom.fr/fr/domaines-dintervention/concurr...


Qu'est-ce qu'un détournement de clientèle ?

On peut considérer qu'un salarié détourne la clientèle de son employeur lorsqu'il démarche les clients de son employeur pour son propre compte ou pour le compte d'une autre entreprise. On parle également de captation de clientèle.

Le détournement de clientèle est une forme de concurrence déloyale.

Les juges considèrent que tel est le cas lorsque :

le salarié fait délibérément signer, à plusieurs reprises, à des clients de son employeur des ordres de remplacement au profit d'un cabinet concurrent dont il avait prévu de reprendre la direction peu après (Cass. soc., 30 septembre 2003, n° 01-45.066) ;
le collaborateur détourne délibérément des clients de son employeur au profit d'une société concurrente dont il est associé, à compter de la création de cette société et jusqu'à sa démission (Cass. soc., 9 avril 2008, n° 06-46.047).

Attention ! Lorsqu'un salarié quitte une entreprise afin d'en intégrer une autre, le déplacement de la clientèle de l'ancienne entreprise vers la nouvelle (y compris si elle est créée par le salarié concerné) ne constitue pas un acte de concurrence déloyale dès lors qu'aucun procédé déloyal n'a été utilisé (Cass. com., 8 janvier 1991, n° 89-11.367). Les clients sont en effet libres de choisir leurs prestataires et de s'adresser au commerçant ou à l'entreprise de leur choix. Il peut donc arriver qu'un client souhaite continuer sa relation avec le salarié qui s'occupait de son dossier, sans que ce dernier ne lui ai suggéré ou demandé.

Les juges estiment notamment que constitue un procédé déloyal le fait de :

dénigrer ou transmettre des informations inexactes ou mensongères ;
utiliser les signes distinctifs de l'entreprise en vue d'établir une confusion afin de capter sa clientèle ;
détourner et utiliser des listes ou fichiers de clientèle ;
détourner des commandes ;
prospecter systématique les clients de l'entreprise, etc.

Bon à savoir : un salarié, qui crée une entreprise exerçant une activité concurrente sans en avoir informé son employeur ni obtenu son accord, manque à son obligation de loyauté. Il peut faire l'objet d'un licenciement pour faute grave, peu importe que des actes de détournement de clientèle soient ou non établis (Cass. soc., 30 novembre 2017, n° 16-14.541).

https://contrat-de-travail.ooreka.fr/astuce/voir/703595/deto...

https://www.editions-tissot.fr/actualite/droit-du-travail/de...

https://www.anetia.fr/clause-de-non-sollicitation-valable-ma...
Peer comments on this reference comment:

agree AllegroTrans : Well this shows that the term in French law encompasses a number of civil wrongs to which we give separate names in English
1 day 14 hrs
Something went wrong...
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search